COMPLETED IMRFR Internal Scoring Sheet 5.10.16 with 4 Bidders 6-23-16.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 52 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- BD-16-1030-0R100-0R001-00000006553
- Issued by
- Massachusetts
About this file
This document is an Internal Scoring Sheet for a Request for Response (RFR) related to the Vehicle Emission and Safety Test Program for the state of Massachusetts. The RFR covers the management and implementation of the inspection station network, development and implementation of inspection protocols, and the acquisition, provision, and maintenance of inspection station equipment and data systems. Key requirements include workstation designs, equipment specifications, software features, and processes for ensuring accurate vehicle data entry. The contract term is not specified, but the contractor selected will be responsible for training inspectors, providing public communications, and managing the overall program.
The RFR outlines detailed technical requirements for the inspection workstations, including computer, printer, barcode reader, OBD scan tool, cameras, and other equipment. It also covers software functionality, wireless equipment management, and processes to integrate with non-contractor provided equipment at inspection stations. Pricing terms, funding details, and incumbent information are not provided in this document.
View the file
Other files
Show 40 more
Latest 50 of 80 listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.
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
RFR 3.2.1 Tech Response Element
| RFR Checklist | ||||
| based on IM RFR 8 27 15 Pia_9-18-15 - RLR (4) redline 10.13.15 | ||||
| Section | Description | Item | Part | Subpart |
| 3.2.1.1 | Program Description (RFR Section 6.1) | Flow diagram | each step in the inspection process, including what happens if a vehicle fails the emissions and/or safety test | |
| 3.2.1.2 | Inspection Station Network (RFR Section 6.2) | A) Inspection station standards for Contractor provided equip | Standards station must meet to connect to the network. Bidders shall indicate those standards that apply to each different class of Inspection Station | |
| B) Inspection station standards for non-Contractor provided equip | Standards station must meet to connect to the network. Bidders shall indicate those standards that apply to each different class of Inspection Station. (See also RFR Sections 3.3.4 and 6.2.3) | |||
| C) Station agreement key elements | (1) Inspection Stations using equipment, maintenance and consumables procured from the Contractor | |||
| (2) Inspection Stations using equipment, maintenance and consumables procured from suppliers other than the Contractor. | ||||
| For both agreements, Bidders shall explain how they will manage payment of the network participation and any monthly fees, and how they will address instances where Inspection Stations fail to pay the fees. The Agencies encourage Bidders to propose innovative conditions and forms of agreement that will reduce emissions, improve Vehicle safety, or result in a better working relationship between the Inspection Stations, the Contractor, and the Agencies | how they will manage payment of the network participation and any monthly fees | |||
| how they will address instances where Inspection Stations fail to pay the fees | ||||
| D) Obstacles | describe any anticipated obstacles to quality program implementation at stations which procure equipment, maintenance and consumables from a source other than the Contractor. | |||
| 3.2.1.3 | Workstations (See RFR Section 6.3) | General | Bidders shall describe their Workstation designs, including details about the computer, software, Bar Code reader, and OBD test system. Bidders should describe what changes and additions they would recommend to the Workstation requirements, including the Contractor requirements described in RFR Section 6.3, and functional specifications contained in Attachment A. | |
| A. Workstation Equipment | A. Bidders shall describe their ability to meet or exceed the Workstation requirements described in RFR Section 6.3 and Attachment A. | |||
| B. Specific equipment | 1. The computer, including all accessories described in Attachment A section 2.2.2 | |||
| 2. The sticker/VIR printer(s), including the time to warm up prior to printing the first print, pages per minute printed, capacity of the tray(s), expected lifetime of the printer (years or pages printed), the ability for the printer(s) to self-report and alert the user and Help Desk of problems, what metrics shall be used to determine and track the remaining useful life of the printer(s) and how that information will be available to the user, the plan for replacing printers that have reached end of life, and the Bidder’s experience with servicing the printer(s) | ||||
| 3. The Bar Code reader described in Attachment A section 2.2.3, including the length of the cable, construction of the cable (materials, wire gauge, shielding, etc...), type of connection to the computer, its ruggedized features for withstanding an automotive shop environment, its ability to scan VINs through the windshield, and protocol for performing the functional check described in Attachment A section 3.6.3.2 | ||||
| 4. The optional wireless Bar Code reader described in Attachment A section 2.2.3, its method and range of wireless transmission, its method of battery charging, its backup power option if the battery is not charged, its method of docking/locating to prevent loss, and the anticipated lifetime for batteries | ||||
| 5. The OBD scan tool described in Attachment A section 2.2.4, including all of its components, such as cables and connectors, their construction (materials, wire gauge, shielding, etc.,) its method of interface with the computer, the overall length of the cable from workstation to DLC, its ruggedized features for withstanding an automotive shop environment, where sensitive components such as the interface will be installed and how they will be protected, the Bidder’s experience using the scan tool in other programs including its communication success rate, and hardware and protocol for performing the operational check described in Attachment A section 3.6.3.3 | ||||
| 6. The OBD scan tool’s ability to connect and communicate with heavy duty OBD equipped vehicles; | ||||
| 7. Optional wireless OBD scan tool, its method and range of wireless transmission, its method of battery charging, its backup power option if the battery is dead or not charged, its method of docking/locating to prevent loss, and the anticipated lifetime for batteries | ||||
| 8. The Workstation cabinet, as described in Attachment A section 2.2.1, including drawings of the workstation cabinet design including dimensions, the locations of all workstation equipment, security features, material/finish specifications, proposed method for securing the monitor to the workstation cabinet, and any other relevant information | ||||
| 9. The GPS device including its resolution, its method of connecting to the computer, its ability to receive signals inside inspection station buildings, the Bidder’s plan for dealing with workstation locations may that impede reliable GPS readings, and the Bidder’s proposal for establishing a “geo-fence” for each workstation, outside of which the workstation shall be locked out from performing inspections | ||||
| 10. The signature pad for heavy-duty workstations, including the size of the window for signatures, its method of connecting to the computer, and its ability to withstand an automotive shop environment | ||||
| C. Additional requirements | 1. Any other choices of equipment or configurations offered for the Workstations | |||
| 2. Their maintenance program, including preventative maintenance, service response times, and mechanisms for fixing Workstation problems | ||||
| 3. A solution that eliminates the need to walk back and forth between the vehicle and workstation when performing the OBD scan. (See RFR Section 6.3.3.3.1) | ||||
| D. Cameras | 1. The cameras Bidders propose to meet the requirements described in RFR Section 6.3.3.1 and Attachment A section 2.2.7 including providing brand names, model numbers, specifications such as resolution, ability to adjust to varying light conditions, durability and suitability for a shop environment, the camera’s method of connecting to the computer, the durability of the connections, and the Bidder’s past experience using this equipment, if applicable | |||
| 2. How Bidders will ensure all cameras are operational, able to capture clear images and video, and are pointed in the correct direction prior to each inspection | ||||
| 3. How Bidders will ensure that an image of the inspector’s face was captured during log-in | ||||
| 4. The camera’s proposed resolution and file size for still images and resolution and frame rates for videos. Bidders may propose different specifications depending on the type of inspection performed | ||||
| 5. The Bidder’s solution for ensuring large video files are successfully transmitted to the Database without disrupting or delaying inspection processes | ||||
| E. physical samples of: | 1. wired OBD scan tool | |||
| 2. wireless OBD scan tool | ||||
| 3. hand-held camera including all cables and accessories | ||||
| 4. headset for live video conferences | ||||
| F. Diesel Opacity Meter | Bidders shall describe their ability to procure new Dieseltune DX-270 meters or their replacement for existing stations that choose to purchase a new meter, and for new stations entering the program for the initial Contract period. | |||
| G. Equipment Battery Charging | Bidders shall describe how the hand-held camera and wireless equipment (OBD scan tool and barcode scanner) will perform for stations that may power down their workstations for long periods of time between inspections (e.g., fleet stations and mobile stations), including how long it takes for the equipment to lose its charge, how long Bidders anticipate the wireless equipment to recharge from a discharged battery, and what steps can be taken to keep wireless equipment charged when the workstation is shut down for long periods of time. | |||
| H. Software | 1. what basic functions will performed by Workstation software vs. Database software | |||
| 2. software features that improve user-friendliness, security, and the likelihood of an accurate, properly conducted test | ||||
| 3. how Bidders will solicit input from Inspection Station representatives to ensure the inspection software meets the needs of the user | ||||
| 4. how Bidders will distribute updates of software to the Workstations | ||||
| 5. how Bidders will maintain, enhance, and upgrade the software over the duration of the Contract | ||||
| 6. how Bidders will ensure that software bugs are fixed and implemented in accordance with a time frame agreed upon between the Agencies and the Contractor within the Scope of Services | ||||
| I. Vehicle data entry | Bidders shall provide a detailed description of how they plan to ensure simple, accurate, and consistent vehicle data entry with minimal inspector manual entry. This description shall, at minimum, address the following: | |||
| 1. the specific software tools, such as the VIN decoder and any lookup tables that will be used to facilitate accurate data entry, the class of vehicles that will be covered (e.g., light duty non-diesel <=8,500 lbs.), and the frequency at which those tools will be updated | ||||
| 2. the steps that will be taken to ensure the correct vehicle GVWR is entered. Of greatest concern to the Agencies are Vehicles in the 8,000 to 9,000 lbs. GVWR range which straddle the 8,500 lbs. light-duty OBD test cutoff. Other critical cutoffs are 10,000 lbs. GVWR for the non-commercial safety inspection and 14,000 lbs. GVWR for medium-duty OBD testing | ||||
| 3. the VIN decoder’s ability to properly identify plug-in hybrids, electric vehicles and fuel types for alternative fueled vehicles | ||||
| 4. the steps that will be taken to assist inspectors with entering vehicles not included in the VIN Decoder or lookup tables (e.g., diesels, medium-duty, heavy-duty, and new vehicles) | ||||
| J. OBD scan | Bidders shall propose a solution that eliminates the need for the inspector to walk back and forth between the workstation and vehicle during the OBD scan as described in RFR Section 6.3.3.3.1. | |||
| K. Real-time Inspection QA/Test Interruption | 1. a description of the process that automatically alerts the Contractor of the QA failure and allows the Contractor to initiate a live conference with the inspector, including what software and applications will be used | |||
| 2. what methods and references Bidders will use to determine whether inspector changes to model year, fuel type , or GVWR entries (as described in Attachment A sections 3.6.1.1.4.1 and 3.6.1.1.6.3) constitute an improper inspection | ||||
| 3. what methods Bidders will use to detect vehicles that do not match the expected OBD parameters (as described in Attachment A section 3.6.1.1.7.9.2), details about the source of the Bidders’ reference data, how often the reference data will be updated, and how the reference data will be matched against the vehicle being tested | ||||
| 4. any tools and additional data Bidders plan to use to determine the nature of the QA failure | ||||
| 5. the qualifications, number of staff, and location of staff that will respond to QA failures | ||||
| 6. Bidders’ proposed maximum time to respond to QA failures (not to exceed 120 seconds) and percentage of QA failures they plan to respond to within their proposed time limit | ||||
| 7. how Bidders will handle high volumes of QA failures and how they will prioritize their responses | ||||
| 8. what alternatives Bidders propose to the process outlined by the Agencies. | ||||
| L. Windshield Stickers and Vehicle Inspection Reports (VIR) | 1. describe the printer(s), sticker stock, and VIR stock proposed | |||
| 2. describe the portions of the sticker that are pre-printed by the sticker supplier and the portions that are printed by the workstation printer | ||||
| 3. describe the quality assurance measures that shall be used to ensure the VIR and sticker are printed correctly, printed on the correct sticker stock number, and are legible | ||||
| 4. describe how the sticker will be resistant to degradation (such as fading and peeling) over the lifetime of the sticker and what quality assurance procedures shall be used to ensure that stickers consistently meet fade and degradation standards | ||||
| 5. estimate the time it will take to print one sticker and one single page VIR | ||||
| 6. explain the methods Bidders will employ to prevent theft, tampering, and counterfeiting of windshield stickers and vehicle inspection reports | ||||
| 7. describe all bar coding standards to be employed | ||||
| 8. describe how Bidders will demonstrate that the security measures are effective; and | ||||
| 9. describe how stickers will be tracked and reported from “cradle to grave,” e.g. from manufacture to final status as either 1) used for inspection, 2) voided/damaged, 3) stolen, or 4) unused/available | ||||
| M. Workstation Acceptance Testing | Bidders shall describe their proposed acceptance testing procedures and schedule including, but not limited to | |||
| 1. test protocols to demonstrate the Workstations’ ability to | ||||
| a) interpret and adjust test procedures/logic based on settings in the Network Control File | ||||
| b) apply test selection logic so all types of vehicles inspected in the Program receive the proper inspection | ||||
| c) correctly perform all four types of Safety Inspections (non-commercial, commercial, motorcycle, and 7D) | ||||
| d) correctly perform OBD inspections, communicate with light, medium and heavy-duty Nondiesel and Diesel OBD vehicles using all existing OBD communications protocols, and quickly retrieve accurate data from the vehicles’ OBD system | ||||
| e) correctly perform diesel opacity inspections for the wide range of classes of diesel vehicles subject to the test | ||||
| f) efficiently and accurately transfer data to and from the Database | ||||
| 2. their plan for beta testing with the Agencies’ staff and Inspection Station representatives | ||||
| 3. description of the acceptance test subjects (e.g., vehicle types, OBD simulators, etc.) and the sample sizes for each test | ||||
| 4. data collection and analysis methods, including any intermediate calculations that will be used to determine compliance with the diesel opacity test specification | ||||
| 5. correction procedures and timelines for shortcomings discovered during acceptance testing | ||||
| 3.2.1.4 | Network Management (See RFR Section 6.4) | A. Improper Inspections | 1. Their strategy for implementing the quality assurance measures for Inspections specified in Attachment A | |
| 2. Their proposed maximum time to respond for test interruptions | ||||
| 3. What percentage of test interruptions they shall respond to for weekday and Saturday Help Desk hours | ||||
| 4. Any additional measures that should be considered to address improper inspections | ||||
| B. Workstation Quality Control | 1. Their strategy for analyzing equipment calibration | |||
| 2. How the Bidders propose to perform and document the needed pre-emptive repairs that are identified | ||||
| 3. The Bidder’s strategy for monitoring equipment failures and identifying revisions needed to the performance standards to refine their effectiveness | ||||
| C. Safety and Environmental Management | Bidders shall describe their proposed safety and environmental management plan elements for Workstations and Inspection Stations, including how the plan will address and maintain minimum requirements | |||
| 3.2.1.5 | Inspection Database (See RFR Section 6.5) | General | Bidders should note that the Agencies will favor responses that maximize reliability, speed of response, and user-friendliness for inspectors and the Agencies. | |
| A. Overview | Provide an overview of their proposed Database system. This overview must include a logical data model for all data in the data warehouse category. The model must include an entity-relationship diagram, descriptions of entities, and an attribute list for each entity. A complete, detailed data dictionary is not required for this response. A brief description of the methodology and tools used to create the model and a key explaining the diagrams must be included. | |||
| B. Performance | Explain how the Database will meet or exceed the reliability and response time specifications for the anticipated volume of inspections. Bidders who believe that alternative organizations of data, measurements of performance, reliability standards, or system requirements would be more cost effective should, in addition, describe their alternatives. The potential impact of alternatives on cost should be addressed in the cost response as an option. | |||
| C. Data transmission problems | Describe specific, potential causes of data transmission problems and plans to identify and resolve these problems in a timely fashion. This must include a network topology that shows: |
1. how Workstations will communicate with the Database;
| 2. how the Database will communicate with ALARS and VISITS; and | |
| 3. how Agency staff will communicate with the Database and data warehouse. | |
| D. ALARS interactions | 1. plans for transferring data to and from ALARS; |
| 2. how ALARS data will be verified; | |
| 3. how discrepancies between ALARS and the Database will be managed and resolved; | |
| 4. plans to track Inspection Station and inspector licensing information including any interaction with MassDOT/RMV necessary to keep Contractor data synchronized with MassDOT/RMV data; | |
| 5. how any ALARS or MassDOT/RMV data will be stored anywhere in the Database (formats, security, retention period, etc.); and | |
| 6. plans for accommodating the RMVM program that will replace ALARS. | |
| E. Security | Describe how security for the Database and Workstation communications with the Database will be ensured and what protocols will be used to back up data and protect against tampering and man-made and natural disasters. Is the proposed environment a FedRAMP secure data center, received an Authority to Operate (ATO) on FedRAMP Moderate or have a certification pending? As an alternative, the Bidder must be willing to represent/warrant to the Commonwealth in the RFR Response that the data center meets the FedRAMP moderate standards. |
| F. Data Warehouse | Describe a plan to provide the Agencies access to the Data Warehouse, including plans to meet the requirements for each category of information. Describe how often the Inspection Data Warehouse will be updated. |
| G. Nightly Data Transfer | Describe a plan to provide nightly transfers of particular inspection data to the Agencies for local storage as described in RFR Section 6.5.8. |
| H. Problem Tracking Software | Describe the proposed problem tracking and help desk software. Describe what processes and features will be used to ensure consistent data entry, classification of tickets, and avoid errors due to typos of critical data such as station ID, workstation ID, VIN, license plate, etc. Describe how all data collected and generated from the help desk software will be accessible on the Database and how often it will be updated. |
| I. Reporting | Describe the complex reports, raw data reports, and automated statistical reports proposed to monitor the Program and Database functions. |
| J. Data Migration | Describe the plan and schedule for migrating inspection data from the previous Program into the Database as described in RFR Section 6.5.10. |
| K. Data Processing Facilities | Describe the location of all data processing facilities inside and outside of the Commonwealth that will perform any function related to the inspection program. |
| L. Misc. | Describe the coding languages and/or tools that will be principally used to develop the software needed for the Database. This must include a description of the Database management system that will be used to store data warehouse information and any information that originates from ALARS or MassDOT/RMV. Bidders shall explain the anticipated level of Bidder staffing that will be provided to meet the Agencies’ reporting and development needs. |
| M. Database Acceptance Testing | Bidders shall describe their proposed acceptance testing procedures and schedule, including |
| 1. Test protocols to demonstrate the Database’s ability to: |
a) transmit and receive inspection data from the Database to the Workstations and ALARS and meet the accuracy and response time requirements in RFR Section 6.5.3
| b) transmit data reliably and accurately to VISITS and the data warehouse; |
| c) meet the standard benchmarks for data warehouse performance for the duration of the Contract; |
| d) create the reports described in RFR Section 6.5.9; |
| e) track all network fees and reliably transfer all Station network participation fees to the MassDOT/RMV account; and, |
| f) migrate inspection data from the current Program |
| 2. Test protocols to demonstrate the functionality of: |
a) the tracking system for all questions, problems, or service interruptions as described in RFR Sections 6.8.1.3, 6.8.2, and 6.8.3.1;
| b) the interactive application that will allow the Agencies immediate access to inspection data as described in RFR Section 6.5.4.2; | |||
| c) the Agencies’ access to the data warehouse; and, | |||
| d) the maintenance and help desk. | |||
| 3. How the acceptance testing of the Database will coincide with acceptance testing of the Workstations. | |||
| 4. Correction procedures for shortcomings discovered during acceptance testing. | |||
| N. Database Quality Assurance Plan | The Bidder must provide a detailed description of the Bidder’s quality assurance methodology with respect to any proposed Database functions, and how the Bidder will maintain Quality Assurance throughout the Course of the Contract. | ||
| O. Risk Management Plan | The Bidder must describe its approach to Risk Management methodology including how the Bidder intends to manage project risk through the project. | ||
| P. Bidder’s Existing Agreements and other Documentation | The Bidder must submit unlocked, editable versions of any of the Bidder’s applicable existing SaaS or PaaS subscriptions, software license and maintenance agreements, nondisclosure, privacy policies, data management policies, technical support descriptions, maintenance descriptions or other boilerplate agreements for products and services included in the proposed solution. | ||
| Q. Service Level Agreement | The Bidder must provide a draft version of their service level agreements, which should include their service levels, and method by which the levels are measured. The service level agreements must be equivalent to or exceed the minimum mandatory requirements set forth in the Cloud Terms (Attachment L). The Database, once deployed, must meet technical support response parameters (time to respond and time to repair) or equivalent measures, which will be negotiated and finalized as Service Level Agreements (SLAs) in the Scope of Services. | ||
| 3.2.1.6 | Violations, Investigations and Scheduling, Information and Tracking System (VISITS) (See RFR Section 6.6 and Attachment E) | A. VISITS APPLICATION: Bidders shall: | 1. describe their plan to migrate data from the existing VISITS to the proposed VISITS application; including VISITS data entered by field investigators right up until the end of the existing program on September 30, 2017 |
| 2. describe how the Bidder’s proposed application will work when the field site does not have internet access | |||
| 3. describe what security features the Bidder will implement to prevent unauthorized use or access to the application | |||
| 4. propose a solution for how an Inspection Station’s Workstation printer may be used to print audit/inspection results and violations from the tablet | |||
| 5. propose a solution for how audit/inspection results and violations may be delivered to an Inspection Station’s Workstation mailbox | |||
| 6. describe the reporting and analysis tool the Bidder plans to provide for performing ad-hoc queries | |||
| 7. How they plan to meet the requirements in RFR Section 6.6 and Inspection Checklist functional specifications identified in Appendix E | |||
| B. TABLETS: Bidders shall propose the tablets they plan to provide including: | 1. the make, model and relevant specifications of the tablet; | ||
| 2. the tablet’s overall dimensions, screen size, and weight | |||
| 3. the tablet’s screen visibility under bright lights and direct sunlight | |||
| 4. security features of the tablet to ensure the identification of the user | |||
| 5. the anticipated battery life and method and time for recharge | |||
| 6. specifications for the wireless network access the Bidder will be providing, including connection speed and unlimited data plan | |||
| 7. their plan for periodic replacement of the tablets | |||
| C. MOBILE PRINTING SOLUTION: Bidders shall propose a mobile printing solution that includes | 1. the make, model and relevant specifications of the printer | ||
| 2. how the tablet will connect to the printer | |||
| 3. how the printer will be powered | |||
| 4. how the printer will perform in the temperature range anticipated (sub-freezing to 100 deg. F) | |||
| 5. any limitations or potential problems with their printing solution | |||
| 6. the Bidder’s plan for any necessary/periodic replacement of the printers | |||
| 3.2.1.7 | Inspector Training and FMCSA Equivalency (See RFR Section 6.7) | A. Inspector Training | Bidders shall outline their inspector training programs and explain how they will make the programs accessible to prospective inspectors. The Agencies encourage Bidders to propose flexible training techniques, such as self-paced multimedia instruction, as a supplement to instructor-led training. Bidders shall describe any strategies they will employ to make their training plan more cost effective. |
| B. Inspector Orientation | Bidders shall outline their inspector orientation programs and explain how they will make the orientation programs accessible to Inspectors. The Agencies encourage Bidders to propose flexible training techniques, such as self-paced multimedia instruction, as a supplement to instructor-led training. Bidders shall describe any strategies they will employ to make their training plan more cost effective. | ||
| C. Commercial Vehicle certification | Bidders shall outline the process by which they expect to maintain the Massachusetts Commercial Vehicle Inspection certification as equivalent to 49 CFR part 396.17 by the Administrator of the FMCSA as described under 49 CFR part 396.23 | ||
| 3.2.1.8 | Motorist and Industry Communications (See RFR Section 6.8) | A. Draft communication plan - general | Bidders shall provide a draft communications plan for providing basic Program information to motorists/vehicle owners. The draft plan shall include specific activities and an implementation schedule. Bidders shall describe specific methods for delivering messages to target audiences, and how the methods will be implemented |
| B. Draft communication plan - details | Bidders shall include in the draft plan a description of the measures to resolve motorist problems including: a description of the structure, staffing levels, proposed training program, and likely geographic location of a motorist telephone hotline; their proposal for managing responses to questions and complaints that are submitted electronically, via the Program web site; how the delivery mechanisms for providing Program information will be established and maintained throughout the Contract; and any other motorist problem resolution activities they propose to ensure that problems are resolved effectively and efficiently by the Contractor. | ||
| C. Routine communications | Bidders shall include in the draft plan a description of how they will address routine communications needs that arise at the start of or during the course of the Contract, including roll-out of new or revised Program components, and how other routine (but currently unplanned) communications needs will be addressed | ||
| D. Plan effectiveness | Bidders shall include in the draft plan specific measures that will be employed to evaluate the effectiveness of the plan. Evaluation of the success of the motorist problem resolution measures plan shall include a periodic (e.g., quarterly) assessment of the content of motorists’ questions, in order to identify any need to revise consumer information and/or to develop non-routine public communications activities. Bidders shall explain the rationale behind the activities proposed to address each of these measures. | ||
| E. Recall info | The draft plan shall describe how Bidders will integrate safety and emissions related recall information into the program. The specific source of this information should be identified; as should the delivery mechanism(s) the contractor will use to provide information to the motorist, and steps the Contractor will take to ensure that all motorists have access to recall information | ||
| F. Inspection Station support | Bidders shall describe their proposed Inspection Station support program. The description shall include a summary of the following: | ||
| 1. their program to receive, log, track, and report on problems reported by Inspection Stations; | |||
| 2. their Workstation service plan for repairing or replacing malfunctioning equipment. | |||
| G. Inspector and Repair Technician Support | Bidders shall describe their proposed Inspector and repair technician support program. The description shall include a summary of the following: | ||
| 1. the Bidder’s program to receive, log, track, and report on problems reported by Inspectors and repair technicians, including whether the Repair Technician Hotline will be integrated with the Inspection Station Hotline | |||
| 2. the Bidder’s proposal for repair technician information sharing | |||
| 3. the Bidder’s proposal for the newsletter, including their plan for producing and distributing this publication, and any additional periodic communications (blog, etc.); | |||
| 4. the Bidder’s proposal for the Program web site and how it will communicate the required elements to the Inspector and repair technician community. | |||
| H. Repair industry | Bidders shall describe how they intend to inform the repair industry of the resources provided by the program and monitor the industry’s satisfaction with the program. | ||
| I. Subcontractor Qualifications | Bidders must identify and summarize the qualifications of any subcontractors they plan to employ (e.g., to design and maintain the Program’s web site, or to design and distribute collateral materials) | ||
| 3.2.1.9 | Covert Auditing (See RFR Section 6.9) | A. Covert Audits | Bidders shall describe their strategy for meeting the performance requirements for covert auditing, including but not limited to: |
| 1. the number of covert auditors needed to perform the projected number of covert vehicle and covert visual audits, including any overlapping staffing requirements and any labor-saving technologies or strategies Bidders propose to employ; | |||
| 2. the number of covert audit vehicles needed for the covert vehicle fleet to provide the required number of covert vehicle audits and minimize the likelihood of discovery | |||
| 3. a statement that the Contractor shall email the results of failing audits to Agency staff within two business days of the inspection(s) observed or a description of a proposed alternative performance requirement | |||
| 4. recommendations for whether the Agencies should receive downloaded video and image files attached to the emails for failing covert audits, or if attaching such files to email may cause problems and whether another way of obtaining, and sharing, the downloads is preferable | |||
| 5. the basis for a proposed conversion factor for converting vehicle audits to visual audits, or vice versa, if the Agencies adjust the relative number of required covert vehicle and covert visual audits | |||
| 6. a description of how the covert audit reporting requirements would be integrated in the Database; | |||
| 7. a schedule for beginning covert auditing | |||
| 3.2.1.10 | Maintenance Initiative (VMI) (See RFR Section 6.10) | A. Vision | Bidders shall describe their vision and plans for maintaining and/or improving the VMI. |
| B. Curriculum | Bidders shall describe what they envision as the curriculum for the supplemental OBD Training Course, and any plans for contracting with outside trainers for the training. | ||
| C. Ongoing training | Bidders shall describe how they intend to implement the elements of the ongoing training program | ||
| D. Describe how they intend to: | 1. register Registered Repairers and Registered Repair Facilities; | ||
| 2. provide a means for Registered Repairers to enter repair information in the Database | |||
| 3. calculate the Emissions Repair Success Rating (ERSR) for Registered Repair Facilities as specified in Attachment D | |||
| 4. update ERSRs in the database and on VIRs | |||
| 5. select Registered Repair Facilities for printing on the VIRs of stations | |||
| 6. provide the Agencies with access to related information in the Database | |||
| E. Additional measures | Bidders shall describe the additional measures they propose for additional training, recruitment, or other measures to promote effective repairs, assist repairers seeking ASE certifications or recertifications, and otherwise increase the number of Registered Repairers and Registered Repair Facilities. | ||
| 3.2.1.11 | Motorist Assistance Centers (See RFR Section 6.11) | Bidders shall propose Motorist Assistance Centers providing the services specified in this section. Bidders shall indicate the staffing levels needed to perform the required services. Bidders should review RFR Section 6.11.1 for information on historic activity at Motorist Assistance Centers. | |
| A - Repair related Assistance | Bidders shall describe their strategy for providing the required assistance to motorists and emissions repairers, and include the following information in their Response: | ||
| 1. what is the division of labor and level of staffing for various tasks under this element | |||
| 2. how communications from motorists and emissions repairers (phone calls, letters, emails, etc.) will be logged and tracked to ensure that all requests for assistance are answered promptly and receive a timely response | |||
| 3. how the required certifications or other professional requirements for Bidder staff will be monitored to ensure staff continue to meet minimum qualifications | |||
| 4. what customer service training will be provided | |||
| 5. how the Bidder will monitor customer service staff to ensure motorists are treated courteously and receive correct information | |||
| 6. what the Bidder proposes to monitor in the repair-related assistance process to identify areas for possible improvement and to communicate those recommendations to the Agencies | |||
| B. Emissions Waiver and Hardship Extension Administration | Bidders shall describe their strategy for providing the required emissions waiver and hardship extension administration services, and include the following information in their Response: | ||
| 1. what is the division of labor and level of staffing for various tasks under this element | |||
| 2. how communications from motorists and emissions repairers (phone calls, letters, emails, etc.) will be logged and tracked to ensure that all requests for assistance are answered promptly and receive a timely response | |||
| 3. how the required professional requirements for Bidder staff will be monitored to ensure staff continue to meet minimum qualifications | |||
| 4. what customer service training will be provided | |||
| 5. what internal checks the Bidder will implement to ensure that emissions waivers are issued only to qualifying vehicles | |||
| 6. how the Bidder proposes to maintain motorist information submitted to qualify for an emissions waiver for auditing by the Agencies; | |||
| 7. how and what the Bidder proposes to monitor in the emissions waiver process to identify areas for possible improvement and to communicate those recommendations to the Agencies | |||
| C. Readiness Assistance | Bidders shall describe their strategy for providing the required readiness assistance services, and include the following information in their Response | ||
| 1. what level of effort is needed for readiness assistance services, based upon the Bidder’s experience in other programs, including but not limited to a general knowledge of readiness (including vehicles that have readiness problems), knowledge of vehicles that have problems resetting the catalytic converter monitor to ready, and other relevant information | |||
| 2. the division of labor and level of staffing for various tasks under this element | |||
| 3. how communications from motorists and emissions repairers (phone calls, letters, e-mails, etc.) will be logged and tracked to ensure that all requests for assistance are answered promptly and receive a timely response | |||
| 4. what customer service training will be provided | |||
| 5. how the Bidder will monitor customer service to ensure motorists and emissions repairers are treated courteously and receive correct information | |||
| 6. how the required professional requirements for Bidder staff will be monitored to ensure staff continue to meet minimum qualifications | |||
| 7. what the Bidder proposes to monitor in the readiness assistance process to identify areas for possible improvement and to communicate those recommendations to the Agencies. | |||
| D. Targeted Inspections | Bidders shall describe their strategy for providing the required targeted inspection services, and include the following information in their Response | ||
| 1. what is the division of labor and level of staffing for various tasks under this element | |||
| 2. how communications from motorists and emissions repairers regarding targeted inspections (phone calls, letters, emails, etc.) will be logged and tracked to ensure they are answered promptly and receive a timely response | |||
| 3. what customer service training will be provided | |||
| 4. how the Bidder will monitor customer service to ensure motorists and emissions repairers are treated courteously | |||
| 5. how the Bidder will monitor the performance of targeted inspections to ensure that these inspections are performed completely and properly | |||
| 6. how the required professional requirements for Bidder staff will be monitored to ensure staff continue to meet minimum qualifications | |||
| 7. what the Bidder proposes to monitor in the targeted inspection process to identify areas for possible improvement and to communicate those recommendations to the Agencies | |||
| E. Kit Car Inspections | Bidders shall describe their strategy for providing the required kit car inspection services, and include the following information in their Response | ||
| 1. what is the division of labor and level of staffing for various tasks under this element | |||
| 2. how communications from motorists and emissions repairers regarding kit car inspections (phone calls, letters, emails, etc.) will be logged and tracked to ensure they are answered promptly and receive a timely response | |||
| 3. what customer service training will be provided | |||
| 4. how the Bidder will monitor customer service to ensure motorists are treated courteously | |||
| 5. how the Bidder will monitor the performance of kit car inspections to ensure that these inspections are performed completely and properly | |||
| 6. how the required professional requirements for Bidder staff will be monitored to ensure staff continue to meet minimum qualifications | |||
| 7. what the Bidder proposes to monitor in the kit car inspection process to identify areas for possible improvement and to communicate those recommendations to the Agencies | |||
| F. Optional Pickup Service for Replacement Parts and Consumables for Workstations | Bidders shall describe their strategy for providing the required optional pickup services, and include the following information in their Response: | ||
| 1. what is the division of labor and level of staffing for various tasks under this element; | |||
| 2. how communications with station personnel regarding the pickup of replacement parts and consumables at Motorist Assistance Centers (MACs) will be logged and tracked to ensure the requested replacement parts and consumables are available for pickup, and to whom they were provided at the MAC when picked up; | |||
| 3. what customer service training will be provided | |||
| 4. how the Bidder will monitor customer service to ensure station personnel are treated courteously | |||
| 5. what the Bidder proposes to monitor in the replacement parts and consumables MAC delivery process to identify areas for possible improvement and to communicate those recommendations to the Agencies | |||
| G. Provision of Services | Bidders shall provide a detailed plan describing their strategy for providing the required Motorist Assistance Center network, including: | ||
| 1. the extent to which motorist and repairer assistance activities are by appointment and first-come first-served | |||
| 2. what accommodations will be made to comply with applicable provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act | |||
| 3. how motorist assistance services will be provided to areas not readily serviced by a motorist assistance center | |||
| 4. the equipment, informational services, and other materials to be used to outfit and supply the motorist assistance centers | |||
| 5. plans for compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations | |||
| 6. plans for monitoring of Motorist Assistance Centers’ performance to identify areas for possible improvement, and communicating those recommendations to the Agencies. |
OVERALL
Overall Point Score for the Responses
| QUALITATIVE SCORE | SCORE | WEIGHT | WEIGHTED POINT SCORE | ||||||||||
| Criteria 1 - Mgmt Capability, Accountability & Experience | Applus | Opus | Parsons | SGS | Applus | Opus | Parsons | SGS | Applus | Opus | Parsons | SGS | |
| A) Manage & Implement, Provide Staffing Plans | Good++ | Acceptable+ | Good | Acceptable | 7 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 5% | 0.35 | 0.15 | 0.25 | 0.10 |
| B) Develop & Implement Mgmt and Tracking Systems | Outstanding- | Acceptable | Good- | Good+ | 8 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 3.4% | 0.27 | 0.07 | 0.14 | 0.20 |
| C) Depth and Breadth of Experience | Good++ | Good- | Good | Good- | 7 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 4% | 0.28 | 0.16 | 0.20 | 0.16 |
| D) Develop Software and Hardware to Launch on 10/1/17 | Good+ | Acceptable | Good+ | Good | 6 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 5% | 0.30 | 0.10 | 0.30 | 0.25 |
| E) Flexible to Potential Contract Changes | Good++ | Acceptable- | Good- | Good+ | 7 | 1 | 4 | 6 | 3.4% | 0.24 | 0.03 | 0.14 | 0.20 |
| F) Overall Quality of the Response | Good++ | Acceptable+ | Good+ | Good++ | 7 | 3 | 6 | 7 | 4.2% | 0.29 | 0.13 | 0.25 | 0.29 |
| TOTAL for Criteria 1 | 42 | 15 | 30 | 30 | 25% | 1.73 | 0.64 | 1.27 | 1.21 |
| QUALITATIVE SCORE | SCORE | WEIGHT | WEIGHTED POINT SCORE | ||||||||||||
| Criteria 2 - Data Management | Applus | Opus | Parsons | SGS | Applus | Opus | Parsons | SGS | Applus | Opus | Parsons | SGS | |||
| A) Develop & Maintain Data Systems | Unacceptable | 0 | |||||||||||||
| 1) Proposed Database Systems | Good++ | Good | Good++ | Good+ | 7 | 5 | 7 | 6 | 3% | 0.21 | 0.15 | 0.21 | 0.18 | Acceptable- | 1 |
| 2) Reliability and Response Time | Good+ | Acceptable+ | Good++ | Good++ | 6 | 3 | 7 | 7 | 3% | 0.18 | 0.09 | 0.21 | 0.21 | Acceptable | 2 |
| 3) ALARS interactions | Good++ | Good- | Good++ | Good++ | 7 | 4 | 7 | 7 | 2% | 0.14 | 0.08 | 0.14 | 0.14 | Acceptable+ | 3 |
| 4) Potential Causes of Data Transmission Problems | Good+ | Good- | Good++ | Good++ | 6 | 4 | 7 | 7 | 1% | 0.06 | 0.04 | 0.07 | 0.07 | Good- | 4 |
| 5) Inspection Software | Outstanding- | Good | Good++ | Good+ | 8 | 5 | 7 | 6 | 2% | 0.16 | 0.10 | 0.14 | 0.12 | Good | 5 |
| 6) Data Transfer, Storage and Tracking | Good++ | Good | Good+ | Good++ | 7 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 1.5% | 0.11 | 0.08 | 0.09 | 0.11 | Good+ | 6 |
| 7) Data Security and QA | Good+ | Good+ | Good++ | Good | 6 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 1.5% | 0.09 | 0.09 | 0.11 | 0.08 | Good++ | 7 |
| 8) Database Access and Reporting | Outstanding- | Good++ | Good+ | Good++ | 8 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 3% | 0.24 | 0.21 | 0.18 | 0.21 | Outstanding- | 8 |
| 9) Problem Tracking and Help Desk Software | Good+ | Good+ | Good+ | Good+ | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 0.75% | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | Outstanding | 9 |
| 10) Data Migration from Previous Program | Outstanding- | Good++ | Outstanding- | Outstanding | 8 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 0.5% | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.05 | Outstanding+ | 10 |
| 11) Location of Data Processing Facilities | Good++ | Good++ | Good++ | Good++ | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 0.25% | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | ||
| 12) Database and Inspection software ATP | Outstanding- | Acceptable+ | Outstanding- | Outstanding- | 8 | 3 | 8 | 8 | 0.5% | 0.04 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.04 | ||
| B) Ability to Revise Data Systems as Needs Change | Good++ | Good | Good+ | Good++ | 7 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 2% | 0.14 | 0.10 | 0.12 | 0.14 | ||
| C) Identify Improper and Fraudulent Inspections | Outstanding- | Good- | Outstanding- | Good++ | 8 | 4 | 8 | 7 | 4% | 0.32 | 0.16 | 0.32 | 0.28 | ||
| TOTAL for Criteria 2 | 99 | 71 | 97 | 96 | 25% | 1.79 | 1.21 | 1.73 | 1.68 |
| QUALITATIVE SCORE | SCORE | WEIGHT | WEIGHTED POINT SCORE | ||||||||||
| Criteria 3 - Provide Reliable Testing Equipment | Applus | Opus | Parsons | SGS | Applus | Opus | Parsons | SGS | Applus | Opus | Parsons | SGS | |
| A) Provide Reliable Workstations | |||||||||||||
| 1) Workstations | Outstanding- | Good++ | Outstanding- | Good++ | 8 | 7 | 8 | 7 | 7.5% | 0.60 | 0.53 | 0.60 | 0.53 |
| 2) Stickers and VIRs | Outstanding- | Good | Outstanding | Outstanding- | 8 | 5 | 9 | 8 | 3% | 0.24 | 0.15 | 0.27 | 0.24 |
| B) Provide Reliable Service and Maintenance for Workstations | Outstanding- | Good | Good++ | Outstanding- | 8 | 5 | 7 | 8 | 4.5% | 0.36 | 0.23 | 0.32 | 0.36 |
| TOTAL for Criteria 3 | 24 | 17 | 24 | 23 | 15% | 1.20 | 0.90 | 1.19 | 1.13 |
| QUALITATIVE SCORE | SCORE | WEIGHT | WEIGHTED POINT SCORE | ||||||||||
| Criteria 4 - Program Support Elements | Applus | Opus | Parsons | SGS | Applus | Opus | Parsons | SGS | Applus | Opus | Parsons | SGS | |
| A) Plan for Motorist Assistance Centers | |||||||||||||
| 1) Repair Related Assistance | Good++ | Acceptable | Good | Good+ | 7 | 2 | 5 | 6 | 1% | 0.07 | 0.02 | 0.05 | 0.06 |
| 2) Emissions Waiver Administration | Good+ | Acceptable | Good++ | Good- | 6 | 2 | 7 | 4 | 1% | 0.06 | 0.02 | 0.07 | 0.04 |
| 3) Readiness Assistance and Targeted Inspections | Good+ | Acceptable | Good++ | Good | 6 | 2 | 7 | 5 | 1% | 0.06 | 0.02 | 0.07 | 0.05 |
| 4) Other Provisions of Services (Kit Cars and Consumables) | Good+ | Acceptable | Good++ | Good+ | 6 | 2 | 7 | 6 | 1% | 0.06 | 0.02 | 0.07 | 0.06 |
| 5) Service Plan for MACs | Good++ | Acceptable | Good+ | Good | 7 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 1% | 0.07 | 0.02 | 0.06 | 0.05 |
| B) Vehicle Maintenance Initiative | |||||||||||||
| 1) Plan for Maintaining/Improving the VMI | Good++ | Acceptable+ | Good++ | Good | 7 | 3 | 7 | 5 | 1% | 0.07 | 0.03 | 0.07 | 0.05 |
| 2) Training Curriculum | Acceptable+ | Acceptable+ | Good | Acceptable- | 3 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 1% | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.01 |
| 3) Incentive for Technicians to Become Registered | Good++ | Acceptable | Good++ | Good | 7 | 2 | 7 | 5 | 1% | 0.07 | 0.02 | 0.07 | 0.05 |
| 4) Emissions Repair Index, Quality of Data, etc. | Good++ | Acceptable- | Good | Good | 7 | 1 | 5 | 5 | 1% | 0.07 | 0.01 | 0.05 | 0.05 |
| C) Motorist & Industry Communications | |||||||||||||
| 1) Motorist Communications | Good+ | Acceptable+ | Good | Good | 6 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 1% | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.05 |
| 2) Motorist Resolution | Good+ | Good- | Good | Good | 6 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 1% | 0.06 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.05 |
| 3) Industry Communications | Good++ | Acceptable+ | Good | Good++ | 7 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 1% | 0.07 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.07 |
| 4) Other | Good | Good- | Good | Good | 5 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 1% | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.05 |
| D) Inspector Training | |||||||||||||
| 1) Outline Inspector Training Processes | Good | Acceptable | Good+ | Good++ | 5 | 2 | 6 | 7 | 1% | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.06 | 0.07 |
| 2) Outline Inspector Orientation Processes | Good | Acceptable | Good | Good | 5 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 1% | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.05 | 0.05 |
| TOTAL for Criteria 4 | 90 | 37 | 87 | 76 | 15% | 0.90 | 0.37 | 0.87 | 0.76 |
| QUALITATIVE SCORE | SCORE | WEIGHT | WEIGHTED POINT SCORE | ||||||||||
| Criteria 5 - Cost & Financial Capability | Applus | Opus | Parsons | SGS | Applus | Opus | Parsons | SGS | Applus | Opus | Parsons | SGS | |
| A) Base Bid | Good | Good | Good | Good | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 3% | 0.15 | 0.15 | 0.15 | 0.15 |
| B) Workstations & Monthly Station Fees & Training Costs | Good | Good | Good | Good | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4% | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.20 |
| C) Costs Reasonable to Cover Program | Good | Good | Good | Good | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0.75% | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| D) Sole Supplier v. Outside Vendor | Good | Good | Good | Good | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0.25% | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| E) Financial Capability of Bidder | Good++ | Good++ | Good++ | Good++ | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 2% | 0.14 | 0.14 | 0.14 | 0.14 |
| TOTAL for Criteria 5 | 27 | 27 | 27 | 27 | 10% | 0.54 | 0.54 | 0.54 | 0.54 |
| QUALITATIVE SCORE | SCORE | WEIGHT | WEIGHTED POINT SCORE | ||||||||||
| Criteria 6 - Supplier Diversity Plan | Applus | Opus | Parsons | SGS | Applus | Opus | Parsons | SGS | Applus | Opus | Parsons | SGS | |
| All Sub Criteria Included | Good+ | Good | Good | Good+ | 6 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 10% | 0.60 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.60 |
| TOTAL for Criteria 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 10% | 0.60 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.60 |
| WEIGHT | WEIGHTED POINT SCORE | ||||
| Applus | Opus | Parsons | SGS | ||
| Totals for Criteria One through Six | 100% | 6.8 | 4.2 | 6.1 | 5.9 |
&D
6.7615000000000007 4.1555 6.0965000000000007 5.9145000000000003
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .