REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP)

EVENT NO.: EVN0040549

EVENT TITLE: FINANCIAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR OCITT

ISSUED BY MIAMI-DADE COUNTY:

Strategic Procurement Department for Office of the Citizens’ Independent Transportation Trust

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CONTACT FOR THIS SOLICITATION:

Princess Brown, Procurement Contracting Officer 111 NW 1st Street, Suite 1300, Miami, Florida 33128

Telephone: (305) 375-3020 Princess.Brown@miamidade.gov

PROPOSALS DUE:

SEE INFORMS

IT IS THE POLICY OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY (COUNTY) THAT ALL ELECTED AND APPOINTED COUNTY OFFICIALS AND COUNTY EMPLOYEES SHALL ADHERE TO THE PUBLIC SERVICE HONOR CODE (HONOR CODE). THE HONOR CODE

CONSISTS OF MINIMUM STANDARDS REGARDING THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF ALL PUBLIC SERVANTS IN THE COUNTY.

VIOLATION OF ANY OF THE MANDATORY STANDARDS MAY RESULT IN ENFORCEMENT ACTION.

(SEE IMPLEMENTING ORDER 7-7)

Electronic proposal responses to this RFP are to be submitted through a secure mailbox at Integrated Financial Resources Management System (INFORMS) until the date and time as indicated in this document. It is the sole responsibility of the Proposer to ensure its Proposal reaches INFORMS before the Solicitation closing date and time. There is no cost to the Proposer to submit a Proposal in response to a Miami-Dade County Solicitation via INFORMS. Electronic Proposal submissions may require the uploading of electronic attachments. The submission of attachments containing embedded documents or proprietary file extensions is prohibited. All documents should be attached as separate files. Proposers must allow sufficient time to complete online forms and upload all Proposal documents. All information and documents must be fully entered, uploaded, acknowledged (“Confirm”) and recorded into INFORMS before the date and time of the INFORMS Solicitation End Date, or the system will stop the process and the submission will be considered late and will not be accepted. No part of a Proposal can be submitted via hardcopy, email, or fax. All expenses involved with the preparation and submission of Proposals to the County, or any work performed in connection therewith, shall be borne by the Proposer(s).

A Proposer may submit a modified Proposal to replace all or any portion of a previously submitted Proposal up until the Proposal due date. The County will only consider the latest version of the Proposal.

Requests for additional information or inquiries must be made in writing and submitted using the question/answer feature provided by INFORMS at https://supplier.miamidade.gov. The County will issue responses to inquiries and any changes to this Solicitation it deems necessary via written addenda issued prior to the Proposal due date and time (see Mandatory Online Forms and Addendum Acknowledgement Section of INFORMS site). Proposers who obtain copies of this Solicitation from sources other than through INFORMS risk the possibility of not receiving addenda and are solely responsible for those risks.

If you submit your proposal and subsequently an Addendum is issued, failure to resubmit the proposal by clicking on the “Submit Proposal” button, after acknowledging Addenda or making any edits to your proposal in INFORMS, will result in your proposal not being received by the County.

https://supplier.miamidade.gov/

Miami-Dade County, FL Contract No. EVN0040549

Rev. 8.13.2025

1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW AND GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS

1.1 Introduction

Miami-Dade County, hereinafter referred to as the County, on behalf of the Citizens’ Independent Transportation Trust (CITT), is soliciting proposals from qualified consultants to provide financial consulting services to the Office of the Citizens’ Independent Transportation Trust (OCITT). Services are rendered on an as-needed basis via work orders.

Section 2-1421(g)(7) of the Miami-Dade County Code, as amended by Ordinance No. 11-13, allows the CITT to retain the services of consultants the CITT deems necessary to assist in its monitoring functions without the need for action by the Board of County Commissioners (Board), so long as the retaining of such consultants does not result in the budget for the Trust exceeding the amount approved by the Board during the annual budget approval process. The ordinance allows the OCITT to award the resultant contracts without additional Board approval.

The County anticipates the OCITT will award one (1) contract for a ten (10) year period.

The anticipated schedule for this Solicitation is as follows:

Deadline for Receipt of Questions: SEE INFORMS Proposal Due Date: SEE INFORMS Evaluation Process: September/October 2026 Projected Award Date: November 2026

1.2 Definitions

The following words and expressions used in this Solicitation shall be construed as follows, except when it is clear from the context that another meaning is intended:

1. The word “CITT” to mean the Citizens’ Independent Transportation Trust.

2. The words “Competitive Selection Committee” to mean the group of individuals who are tasked with reviewing, evaluating and scoring the Proposals submitted in response to this RFP.

3. The word “Contractor” to mean the Proposer that receives any award of a contract from the County as a result of this Solicitation, also to be known as “the prime Contractor”.

4. The word “County” to mean Miami-Dade County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida.

5. The words “Joint Venture” to mean an association of two or more persons, partnerships, corporations, or other business entities under a contractual agreement to conduct a specific business enterprise for a specified period with both sharing profits and losses. The Joint Venture must be a legally formed entity prior to Proposal submission.

6. The word “OCITT” to mean the Office of the Citizens’ Independent Transportation Trust.

7. The word “Proposal” to mean the properly signed and completed written good faith commitment submitted by the Proposer in response to this Solicitation, as amended or modified through negotiations.

8. The word “Proposer” to mean the person, firm, entity or organization, as stated on the Submittal Form, submitting a Proposal to this Solicitation.

9. The word “Responsible Proposer” shall refer to a Proposer that has the capability in all respects to fully perform the contract requirements and the integrity and reliability that will assure good faith performance.

10. The words “Responsive Proposer” shall refer to a Proposer that has submitted a Proposal that conforms in all material aspects to the Solicitation.

11. The words “Scope of Services” to mean Section 2.0 of this Solicitation, which details the work to be performed by the

Contractor.

12. The word “Solicitation” to mean this Request for Proposals (RFP) document, and all associated addenda and attachments.

13. The word “Subcontractor” to mean any person, firm, entity or organization, other than the employees of the Contractor, who contracts with the Contractor to furnish labor, or labor and materials, in connection with the Services to the County, whether directly or indirectly, on behalf of the Contractor.

14. The words “Work”, “Services”, “Program”, or “Project” to mean all matters and things that will be required to be done by the

Contractor in accordance with the Scope of Services, and the terms and conditions of this Solicitation.

15. The words “Work Order” to mean an assignment of work issued by the OCITT to the Contractor to perform work specified in the Scope of Services.

16. The words “Work Plan” to mean a project plan outlining in specific detail how the work in the Work Order will be conducted.

1.3 General Proposal Information

Pursuant to Florida Statutes Section 287.05701, Proposers are hereby notified that the County will not request documentation of, or consider, the social, ideological or political interests of a Proposer when determining if a Proposer is a responsible vendor nor will the County give preference to a Proposer based on the Proposer’s social, ideological or political interests.

The County may, at its sole and absolute discretion, reject any and all or parts of any or all Proposals; accept parts of any and all Proposals; further negotiate project elements including but not limited to project fees, revenues or pricing; postpone or cancel at any time this Solicitation process; or waive any irregularities in this Solicitation or in the Proposals received as a result of this process. In the event that a Proposer wishes to take an exception to any of the terms of this Solicitation, the Proposer shall clearly indicate the exception in its Proposal. The County shall treat the Proposer's inclusion of exceptions, assumptions or alternate terms in the Proposal as requests to negotiate project elements, and the inclusion of same shall not result in the Proposal being deemed non-responsive. The County is not bound to accept any exceptions, assumptions or alternates during negotiations, and the County shall consider a Proposal submitted to be an offer to supply goods or services in strict compliance with the terms of this Solicitation. Exceptions, assumptions or alternates may be considered by the County during negotiations to the extent such exceptions, assumptions or alternates do not materially change any provision of the Solicitation. The County reserves the right to request and evaluate additional information from any Proposer regarding Proposer’s responsibility after the submission deadline as the County deems necessary.

The Proposer’s Proposal will be considered a good faith commitment by the Proposer to negotiate a contract with the County, in substantially similar terms to the Proposal offered and, if successful in the process set forth in this Solicitation and subject to its conditions, to enter into a Contract substantially in the terms herein. Proposer’s Proposal shall be irrevocable until Contract award unless the Proposal is withdrawn. A Proposal may be withdrawn in writing only, addressed to the County contact person for this Solicitation, prior to the Proposal due date and time, or upon the expiration of one hundred eighty (180) calendar days after the opening of Proposals.

As further detailed in the Submittal Form, Proposers are hereby notified that all information submitted as part of, or in support of Proposals will be available for public inspection after opening of Proposals, in compliance with Chapter 119, Florida Statutes, (the "Public Record Law”).

Any Proposer who, at the time of Proposal submission, is involved in an ongoing bankruptcy as a debtor, or in a reorganization, liquidation, or dissolution proceeding, or if a trustee or receiver has been appointed over all or a substantial portion of the property of the Proposer under federal bankruptcy law or any state insolvency law, may be found non-responsible.

To request a copy of any code section, resolution and/or administrative/implementing order cited in this Solicitation, contact the Clerk of the Board at (305) 375-5126, Monday- Friday, 8:00 a.m. – 4:30 p.m.

1.4 Cone of Silence

Pursuant to Section 2-11.1(t) of the Code of Miami-Dade County, as amended (the “Code”), a “Cone of Silence” is imposed upon each RFP after advertisement and terminates at the time a written recommendation is issued. The Cone of Silence prohibits any communication regarding RFPs between, among others:

potential Proposers, service providers, lobbyists or consultants and the County’s professional staff including, but not limited to, the County Mayor and the County Mayor’s staff, County Commissioners or their respective staff;

the County Commissioners or their respective staff and any member of the County's professional staff, other than any professional staff member who is designated by the County Mayor to engage in such communications; or potential Proposers, service providers, lobbyists or consultants, any member of the County’s professional staff, the Mayor, County Commissioners or their respective staff and any member of the respective Competitive Selection Committee.

The provisions do not apply to, among other communications:

oral communications with the staff of the Vendor Outreach and Support Services Section, the responsible Procurement

Contracting Officer (designated as the County’s contact on the face of the Solicitation), provided the communication is limited strictly to matters of process or procedure already contained in the Solicitation document;

oral communications at Pre-Proposal Conferences and oral presentations before Competitive Selection Committees during any duly noticed public meeting, public presentations made to the Board of County Commissioners (the “Board”) during any duly noticed public meeting;

recorded contract negotiations and contract negotiation strategy sessions; or communications in writing at any time with any County employee, official or member of the Board of County Commissioners unless specifically prohibited by the applicable RFP documents.

When the Cone of Silence is in effect, all potential vendors, service providers, bidders, lobbyists and consultants shall file a copy of any written correspondence concerning the particular RFP with the Clerk of the Board, which shall be made available to any person upon request. The County shall respond in writing (if County deems a response is necessary) and file a copy with the Clerk of the Board, which shall be made available to any person upon request. Written communications may be in the form of e-mail, with a copy to the Clerk of the Board at clerkbcc@miamidade.gov.

All requirements of the Cone of Silence policies are applicable to this Solicitation and must be adhered to. Any and all written communications regarding the Solicitation are to be submitted only to the Procurement Contracting Officer with a copy to the Clerk of the Board. The Proposer shall file a copy of any written communication with the Clerk of the Board. The Clerk of the Board shall make copies available to any person upon request.

1.5 Communication with Competitive Selection Committee Members

Proposers are hereby notified that direct communication regarding this Solicitation, written or otherwise, to individual Competitive Selection Committee Members or, to the Competitive Selection Committee as a whole, are expressly prohibited. Any oral communications with Competitive Selection Committee Members other than as provided in Section 2-11.1 of the Code, are prohibited.

1.6 Public Entity Crimes

Pursuant to Paragraph 2(a) of Section 287.133 of the Florida Statutes, a person or affiliate who has been placed on the convicted vendor list following a conviction for a public entity crime may not submit a Proposal for a contract to provide any goods or services to a public entity; may not submit a Proposal on a contract with a public entity for the construction or repair of a public building or public work; may not submit Proposals on leases of real property to a public entity; may not be awarded or perform work as a contractor, supplier, subcontractor, or consultant under a contract with any public entity; and, may not transact business with any public entity in excess of the threshold amount provided in Section 287.017 of the Florida Statutes for Category Two for a period of thirty-six (36) months from the date of being placed on the convicted vendor list.

mailto:clerkbcc@miamidade.gov

1.7 Lobbyist Contingency Fees

a) In accordance with Section 2-11.1(s) of the Code, after May 16, 2003, no person may, in whole or in part, pay, give or agree to pay or give a contingency fee to another person. No person may, in whole or in part, receive or agree to receive a contingency fee.

b) A contingency fee is a fee, bonus, commission or non-monetary benefit as compensation which is dependent on or in any way contingent upon the passage, defeat, or modification of: 1) any ordinance, resolution, action or decision of the County Commission; 2) any action, decision or recommendation of the County Mayor or any County board or committee; or 3) any action, decision or recommendation of any County personnel during the time period of the entire decision-making process regarding such action, decision or recommendation which foreseeably will be heard or reviewed by the County Commission or a County board or committee.

1.8 Collusion

In accordance with Section 2-8.1.1 of the Code, where two (2) or more related parties, as defined herein, each submit a Proposal for any contract, such Proposals shall be presumed to be collusive. The foregoing presumption may be rebutted by the presentation of evidence as to the extent of ownership, control and management of such related parties in preparation and submittal of such Proposals. Related parties shall mean Proposer, the principals, corporate officers, and managers of the Proposer; or the spouse, domestic partner, parents, stepparents, siblings, children or stepchildren of a Proposer or the principals, corporate officers and managers thereof which have a direct or indirect ownership interest in another Proposer for the same contract or in which a parent company or the principals thereof of one Proposer have a direct or indirect ownership in another Proposer for the same contract. Proposals found to be collusive shall be rejected. Proposers who have been found to have engaged in collusion may be considered non-responsible, and may be suspended or debarred, and any contract resulting from collusive bidding may be terminated for default.

1.10 Contracting with Entities of Foreign Countries of Concern Prohibited By submitting a proposal or otherwise entering into, a contract under this Solicitation, the Proposer affirms that it is not in violation of Section 287.138, Florida Statutes (F.S.) titled Contracting with Entities of Foreign Countries of Concern Prohibited. Proposer further affirms that it is not giving a government of a foreign country of concern, as listed in Section 287.138, F.S., access to an individual’s personal identifying information if: a) the Proposer is owned by a government of a foreign country of concern; b) the government of a foreign country of concern has a controlling interest in the Proposer; or c) the Proposer is organized under the laws of or has its principal place of business in a foreign country of concern as is set forth in Paragraphs 2(a)–(c) of Section 287.138, F.S.

This affirmation by the Proposer shall be in the form attached to this Solicitation as Contracting with Entities of Foreign Countries of Concern Prohibited Affidavit.

1.11 Kidnapping, Custody Offenses, Human Trafficking and Related Offenses Affidavit By entering into, amending, or renewing a contract under this Solicitation, the Proposer affirms that it does not use coercion for labor or services and complies with the provisions of Section 787.06, Florida Statutes (“F.S.”), “Human Trafficking. This attestation by the Proposer shall be in the form attached to this Solicitation as the Kidnapping, Custody Offenses, Human Trafficking and Related Offenses Affidavit.

2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES

2.1 Introduction/Background

The Citizens’ Independent Transportation Trust (CITT) is seeking a qualified consultant to provide financial consulting services to the Office of the Citizens’ Independent Transportation Trust (OCITT). The selected Proposer will perform as needed via Work Orders.

The CITT is comprised of a 15 Member Board representing the 13 Commission Districts, the Mayor and the League of Cities, and was created to oversee the People’s Transportation Plan (PTP) funded with the half-percent sales surtax. The CITT appoints the Executive Director of the CITT who leads OCITT. A small staff comprised of professionals and support personnel handle the day-to-day operations of OCITT and provide support for the CITT while coordinating public outreach efforts to keep the community informed regarding the improvements that have been implemented using surtax funds.

On November 5, 2002, the citizens of Miami-Dade County approved a ½ Cent Charter County Sales Surtax (“Surtax”). The purpose of the Surtax is to implement the People’s Transportation Plan (PTP), which is a publicly supported transportation improvement program established to develop an integrated mass transportation network and to complete roadway improvements in Miami-Dade County and its municipalities. Voters also approved, as part of the ballot question the creation of the CITT to: “review, monitor, oversee, audit, and investigate implementation of transportation and transit projects funded in whole or in part with surtax proceeds.” The PTP included a broad range of projects including extensions to the Metrorail system, expansion of the Metrobus system, improving traffic signalization, improving major and neighborhood roads and highways and the funding of municipalities for Transit and transportation projects. Since 2003, the CITT and the Board of County Commissioners approved several program changes to projects contained in the PTP.

Work on the PTP, including municipal projects, has been significant. For example, the Surtax has funded millions for the expansion of Metrorail to the Airport, South Dade Metro Express Bus Rapid Transit, replacement of Metrorail, Metromover and Metrobus vehicles, Central Control Upgrade, fare free Metromover service, Golden Passport program, highway and roadway improvements, street and neighborhood improvements, the County’s Advanced Traffic Management System and much more. The majority of PTP improvements are funded through long-term bonds. The CITT has undertaken initiatives in collaboration with the County to address the financial challenge of a significant potential funding gap for Department of Transportation and Public Works (DTPW) as PTP funds currently used for operating expenses become dedicated to the bond debt payments. These initiatives include ongoing review and modeling of the Pro-Forma, annual updates, examination of DTPW operating and capital budgets, as well as studies and analysis to develop innovative opportunities that improve both DTPW revenues and costs.

2.2 Services to be Provided

A. General Financial Consulting

The selected Proposer shall:

1. Provide general financial consulting services including strategic planning, business planning, fiscal policy formulation, economic analysis, funding usage analysis, benchmarking, transportation funding opportunities analysis, and other planning initiatives, and provide recommendations as needed/requested.

2. Provide ongoing technical assistance.

3. Carry out other requests to provide overall financial analyses/consulting to the CITT.

B. Financial Analysis, Studies and Modeling

The selected Proposer shall:

1. Review and assess the DTPW Pro-Forma with development or maintenance of the CITT Risk Assessment Model, including analysis of scenarios and sensitivity as required. The DTPW Pro-Forma is normally updated each year.

2. Incorporate or develop tools such as modeling, forecasting, projections, scenarios, and simulations.

3. Perform financial sensitivity analyses on transit and transportation programs, projects and operations, taking into account such factors as capital program implementation, regulatory changes and other such issues that may cause a need to review financial operations.

4. Review DTPW Maintenance and Operations Cost Allocation Model in the event that DTPW has future revisions or updates.

5. Conduct studies of transit costs, revenues, policies and procedures, such as benchmarking, peer comparisons, transit capital and operating revenue enhancement evaluations, etc. Such studies may involve gathering data from online databases, publications, journals, as well as local and national contacts with transit or government agencies and other firms or organizations.

C. Performance Management and Measurement

The selected Proposer shall

1. Assist with devising, assessing and implementing performance measures and related processes and systems.

2. Review and analyze Transit Operating and Maintenance (O&M) programs/processes and offer recommendations to align with best practices.

3. Benchmark business process performance and identify business process improvements.

4. Provide PTP surtax revenue and spending score card/progress card.

5. Conduct municipal planning studies, transit cost analysis, benchmarking, and performance measurement.

6. Develop Surtax spending performance measurement updates.

7. Perform miscellaneous related tasks as directed by the OCITT.

2.3 Deliverables

Deliverables for assigned tasks shall be specified in the Work Order (see Section 2.4, Work Order Process). Deliverables shall include reports on all findings and recommendations.

Note: Selected Proposer and/or staff shall be available, when requested, to present its progress, findings, recommendations, or a final report to the OCITT, CITT, Board of County Commissioners and subcommittees thereof.

2.4 Work Order Process

The Work Order process is outlined as follows:

1. When the need arises, the OCITT will issue a Work Order and provide the selected Proposer with details regarding the specific objectives, anticipated deliverables, desired outcomes, and applicable timelines.

2. Work Orders shall be issued by OCITT for all services performed under the contract awarded as a result of this Solicitation.

Multiple Work Orders may be issued simultaneously, as service needs arise. The OCITT anticipates issuing Work Orders based on approved Work Plans.

3. When an assignment falls under multiple key areas as listed in 2.2 above, OCITT, at its sole discretion, will determine which key area to utilize.

Note: All costs incurred in estimating a project shall be the sole responsibility of the selected Proposer. The selected Proposer shall have no claim, financial or otherwise, against OCITT or the County, arising from the modification or cancellation of a Work Order by OCITT. The OCITT reserves the right to establish an alternative, streamlined process for assigning work.

2.5 Work Plan

The selected Proposer shall prepare a written work plan (“Work Plan”) for review and evaluation by OCITT to issue a Work Order.

The Work Plan shall be submitted in accordance with the requirements specified in each request and shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

1. Description of the proposed approach;

2. Estimated number of hours and cost by task, personnel who will be performing the work, including each staff position/title

(referenced in price proposal schedule form 1), hourly rate and estimated number of work hours each will spend on the assignment;

3. Cost per staff person;

4. Travel;

5. Projected timeline of tasks and date of assignment completion; and

6. Total for the assignment

Upon receipt of the written Work Plan by OCITT, the Project Manager and other OCITT assigned staff, OCITT, at its sole discretion, may: a) negotiate the assignment with the selected Proposer, b) recommend modifications to scope of services, if applicable; c) approve the Work Plan as submitted; or d) suspend or cancel the assignment at any time, at no cost to OCITT or the County.

3.0 RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS

3.1 Submittal Requirements

In response to this Solicitation, Proposer should complete and return the entire Proposal Submission Package. Proposers should carefully follow the format and instructions outlined therein. All documents and information must be fully completed and signed as required and submitted in the manner described. Nothing in this RFP shall in any way be utilized to request documentation relating to or authorizing consideration of a Proposer's social, political, or ideological interests when determining if the Proposer is a responsible vendor or give a preference to a Proposer based on the Proposer's social, political, or ideological interests.

The Proposal shall be written in sufficient detail to permit the County to conduct a meaningful evaluation of the proposed services.

Proposers are encouraged to access the links below to assist with submission of responses to the Solicitation.

Recorded eSupplier Workshop https://www.miamidade.gov/global/news-item.page?Mduid_news=news1652724628268780 Password: q37%t+pG

Submit a Bid Job Aid https://www.miamidade.gov/technology/library/informs/job-aid/submit-a-bid.pdf

4.0 EVALUATION PROCESS

4.1 Review of Proposals for Responsiveness

Each Proposal will be reviewed to determine if the Proposal is responsive to the submission requirements outlined in this Solicitation. A responsive Proposal is one which follows the requirements of this Solicitation, includes all documentation, is submitted in the format outlined in this Solicitation, is of timely submission, and has the appropriate signatures as required on each document. Failure to comply with these requirements may result in the Proposal being deemed non-responsive.

4.2 Evaluation Criteria

Proposals will be evaluated by a Competitive Selection Committee which will evaluate and rank Proposals on criteria listed below.

The Competitive Selection Committee will be comprised of executives, professionals and subject matter experts within the County or from private or non-profit sectors, other governmental/quasi-governmental organizations, and retired executives with the appropriate experience and/or knowledge. The criteria are itemized with their respective weights for a maximum total of one hundred (100) points per Competitive Selection Committee Member.

Technical Criteria Points

1. Proposer’s relevant experience, qualifications, and past performance 20

2. Relevant experience and qualifications of key personnel, including 40 key personnel of Subcontractors, that will be assigned to this project, and experience and qualifications of Subcontractors

3. Proposer’s approach to providing the Services requested in this Solicitation 30 https://www.miamidade.gov/global/news-item.page?Mduid_news=news1652724628268780 https://www.miamidade.gov/technology/library/informs/job-aid/submit-a-bid.pdf

Price Criteria Points

4. Proposer’s proposed price 10

Any Proposer, whether a Joint Venture or otherwise, may proffer the experience or qualifications of its corporate parent, sister, or subsidiary (collectively “an Affiliated Company”). However, given the unique nature of individual corporate relationships, Proposers seeking to rely on the experience or qualifications of an affiliated company are advised that the Competitive Selection Committee shall have the discretion to determine what weight, if any, it wishes to give such proffered experience or qualification on a case-by-case basis. Competitive Selection Committee may base such decision on the particulars of the relationship between the Proposer and the Affiliated Company, as evidenced by the information and documentation provided in the Proposer Information Section, during Oral Presentations, or otherwise presented at the request of the Competitive Selection Committee.

Additionally, pursuant to County Resolution No. R-321-23, the Competitive Selection Committee shall be provided with adverse findings or substantiated allegations within the past seven (7) years of the proposal submittal date (collectively “Reports”) of the Miami-Dade Office of the Inspector General (“OIG”) and/or the Miami-Dade County Commission on Ethics and Public Trust (“COE”) regarding any Proposer and their proposed subcontractor(s) under deliberation by the Competitive Selection Committee to be considered in accordance with the evaluation of each applicable criteria identified in the Solicitation. In the event the OIG and/or COE issues Reports after the Competitive Selection Committee has scored and ranked the Proposers, the County Mayor or County Mayor’s designee may re-empanel the Competitive Selection Committee to consider if such Reports would change the rankings. If the Competitive Selection Committee determines that Reports would change the rankings of the Proposer(s) identified in the Reports, then the Competitive Selection Committee shall re-score the Proposer(s) identified in the Report solely based on the impact the information identified in the Report would have on the scoring of the Proposer(s) in accordance with the applicable criteria identified in the Solicitation, re-rank the Proposers, and submit a written justification for the revised rankings to the County Mayor or County Mayor’s designee. Upon review of such re-ranking and the justification, the County Mayor or County Mayor’s designee may accept or reject the revised rankings. The County Mayor shall, in any recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners, either attach all Reports issued by the OIG and/or the COE or provide a description of such Reports and a link to where such Reports may be viewed.

4.3 Oral Presentations

After evaluation of the Proposals on the criteria indicated above (Technical and Price), rating and ranking, the Competitive Selection Committee may choose to conduct an oral presentation with the Proposer(s) which the Competitive Selection Committee deems to warrant further consideration. In making this determination, the Competitive Selection Committee should consider whether a recommendation can be reached without oral presentations or whether there is a need for, or would be a benefit to, holding oral presentations. For instance, oral presentations may be needed to assist the Competitive Selection Committee to make its recommendation and/or to differentiate among the Proposer(s) remaining in consideration due to, among other factors, scores in clusters and/or a close competition. Oral presentations may also be beneficial if clarity on the Proposal(s) is needed or an explanation of the Proposal(s) would be helpful to the process and in scoring, especially on large and/or complex projects, as determined by the Competitive Selection Committee. See “Lobbyist Registration Affidavit” regarding registering speakers in the Proposal for an oral presentation.

Pursuant to Resolution No. R-208-25, if the contract fiscal impact is expected to exceed $25,000,000 per year or $25,000,000 in any year, then oral presentations are required to be held with the three highest-ranked Proposers or all proposers if three or less proposals are received. If the scoring differential between the two highest-ranked proposers exceeds ten percent (10%), then oral presentations shall be conducted at the option of the Competitive Selection Committee.

Unless otherwise advised by the County, oral presentations will only be used for the Proposer to present its Proposal and provide clarifications, if needed, and for the Competitive Selection Committee to ask questions. Proposals cannot be materially changed through oral presentations. Upon completion of the oral presentation(s), if any, the Competitive Selection Committee will re-evaluate, re-rate and re-rank the Proposals from the Proposer(s) invited to oral presentations based upon the written documents, and in consideration of any clarity gained from the oral presentation.

https://www.miamidade.gov/govaction/legistarfiles/MinMatters/Y2023/230339min.pdf https://www.miamidade.gov/govaction/matter.asp?matter=250390&file=false&fileAnalysis=false&yearFolder=Y2025

4.4 Selection Factor

This Solicitation includes a selection factor for Miami-Dade County Certified Small Business Enterprises (SBE's) as follows. A SBE is entitled to receive an additional ten percent (10%) of the total technical evaluation points on the technical portion of such Proposer’s Proposal. Pursuant to Sections 2-8.1.1.1.1 and 2-8.1.1.1.2 of the Code, Proposer shall have all the necessary licenses, permits, registrations and certifications, to include SBE certification, to perform a commercially useful function in the provision of the type of goods and/or services required by this Solicitation. For certification information, contact the Strategic Procurement Department at (305) 375-3111, visit http://www.miamidade.gov/smallbusiness/ or, e-mail your inquiries directly to:

Sbdcert@miamidade.gov.

The SBE must be certified by Proposal submission deadline, at contract award, and for the duration of the Contract to remain eligible for the preference. Firms that graduate from the SBE Program during the Contract term may remain on the Contract.

Any entity may enter into a Joint Venture with a Small Business Enterprise firm for the purposes of creating a Proposer to submit a Proposal in response to this Solicitation and receiving an SBE Selection Factor. Joint ventures will be considered as one entity by the County during the evaluation of the Proposal in response to this Solicitation. Joint ventures must be pre-approved by the Strategic Procurement Department and meet the criteria as established in Implementing Order 3-41 and Sections 2-8.1.1.1.1 and 2-8.1.1.1.2 of the Code for the purposes of receiving an SBE Selection Factor pursuant to this Section.

4.5 Local Certified Veteran Business Enterprise Preference

This Solicitation includes a preference for Miami-Dade County Local Certified Veteran Business Enterprises in accordance with Section 2-8.5.1 of the Code. “Local Certified Veteran Business Enterprise” or “VBE” is a firm that is (a) a local business pursuant to Section 2-8.5 of the Code and (b) prior to Proposal or bid submittal is certified by the State of Florida Department of Management Services as a veteran business enterprise pursuant to Section 295.187 of the Florida Statutes. A VBE that submits a Proposal in response to this Solicitation is entitled to receive an additional five percent of the evaluation points scored on the technical portion of such vendor’s Proposal. If a Miami-Dade County Certified Small Business Enterprise (SBE) measure is being applied to this Solicitation, a VBE which also qualifies for the SBE measure shall not receive the veteran’s preference provided in this section and shall be limited to the applicable SBE preference. At the time of Proposal submission, the firm must affirm in writing its compliance with the certification requirements of Section 295.187 of the Florida Statutes and submit this affirmation and a copy of the actual certification along with the Submittal Form.

4.6 Price Evaluation

The price Proposal will be evaluated subjectively in combination with the technical Proposal, including an evaluation of how well it matches Proposer’s understanding of the County’s needs described in this Solicitation, the Proposer’s assumptions, and the value of the proposed services. The pricing evaluation is used as part of the evaluation process to determine the highest ranked Proposer. The County reserves the right to negotiate the final terms, conditions and pricing of the Contract as may be in the best interest of the County.

4.7 Local Preference

The evaluation of competitive Solicitations is subject to Section 2-8.5 of the Code, which, except where contrary to federal or state law, or any other funding source requirements, provides that preference be given to local businesses. If, following the completion of final rankings by the Competitive Selection Committee a non-local Proposer is the highest ranked responsive and responsible Proposer, and the ranking of a responsive and responsible local Proposer is within 5% of the ranking obtained by said non-local Proposer, then the highest ranked local Proposer shall have the opportunity to proceed to negotiations and the Competitive Selection Committee will recommend that a contract be negotiated with said local Proposer.

4.8 Negotiations

The Competitive Selection Committee will evaluate, score and rank proposals, and submit the results of the evaluation to the Executive Director of OCITT, with its recommendation. The Executive Director of OCITT will determine with which Proposer(s) the County shall negotiate, if any, through the approval of the Competitive Selection Committee Coordinator Report which will be shared through electronic means with all Proposers. The Executive Director of OCITT, at their sole discretion, may direct negotiations with the highest-ranked Proposer, by taking into consideration Local Preference Section above, if any, and/or request a better offer, the discussions may include price and conditions attendant to price.

http://www.miamidade.gov/smallbusiness/ mailto:Sbdcert@miamidade.gov

Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the OCITT and said Proposer(s) cannot reach agreement on a contract, the OCITT reserves the right to terminate negotiations and may, at the Executive Director’s discretion, begin negotiations with the next highest ranked Proposer(s). This process may continue until a contract acceptable to OCITT has been executed or all proposals are rejected. No Proposer shall have any rights against the County or OCITT arising from such negotiations or termination thereof.

Any Proposer recommended for negotiations shall complete a Non-Collusion Affidavit, in accordance with Section 2-8.1.1 of the Code. (If a Proposer fails to submit the required Non-Collusion Affidavit, said Proposer shall be ineligible for award). Attendees actively participating in negotiation with the County and OCITT shall be listed on the Lobbyist Registration Affidavit or registered as a lobbyist with the Clerk of the Board. For more information, please use the following link to access the County’s Clerk of the Board Lobbyist Online Registration and Information System: https://www.miamidade.gov/Apps/COB/LobbyistOnline/Home.aspx

Any Proposer recommended for negotiations may be required to provide to the County:

a) Its most recent certified business financial statements as of a date not earlier than the end of the Proposer’s preceding official tax accounting period, together with a statement in writing, signed by a duly authorized representative, stating that the present financial condition is materially the same as that shown on the balance sheet and income statement submitted, or with an explanation for a material change in the financial condition. A copy of the most recent business income tax return will be accepted if certified financial statements are unavailable.

b) Disclosure of any lawsuits which include allegations of discrimination in the last ten years prior to date of Solicitation, the disposition of such lawsuits, or statement that there are NO such lawsuits, in accord with Resolution No. R-828-19.

4.9 Contract Award

Any proposed contract, resulting from this Solicitation, will be submitted to the Executive Director of OCITT or designee. All Proposers will be notified in writing of the decision of the OCITT Executive Director or designee with respect to contract award.

The contract award, if any, shall be made to the Proposer whose Proposal shall be deemed by the OCITT to be in the best interest of the County. Notwithstanding the rights of protest listed below, the OCITT’s decision of whether to make the award and to which Proposer shall be final.

4.10 Rights of Protest

For the purposes of this Solicitation, the Citizens’ Independent Transportation Trust is acting in lieu of the Board of County Commissioners, and the Executive Director of the Office of Citizens’ Independent Transportation Trust is acting in lieu of the County Mayor for bid protest purposes.

A recommendation for contract award may be protested by a Proposer in accordance with the procedures contained in Sections 2-8.3 and 2-8.4 of the Code, as amended, and as established in Implementing Order No. 3-21.

4.11 Written Objections to Selection Committee Ranking/Scoring and Rights of Protest

A recommendation for contract award may be protested by a Proposer in accordance with the procedures contained in Sections 2-8.3 and 2-8.4 of the Code, as amended, and as established in Implementing Order No. 3-21, as amended. Any question, issue, objection or disagreement concerning the rankings, scoring or recommendations of the Competitive Selection Committee shall be deemed waived by the Protestor and shall be rejected as a basis of a bid protest, unless it is brought by the Proposer to the attention of the Procurement Contracting Officer. Proposers must notify the Procurement Contracting Officer in writing with a copy to the Clerk of the Board within five (5) workdays of receipt of notification of the Competitive Selection Committee Coordinator Report referenced in Section 4.8 above. The written objection shall state with particularity the basis of the objection and with sufficient information to allow the County’s procurement professionals to consider, evaluate and address the issues raised in the objection promptly.

https://www.miamidade.gov/Apps/COB/LobbyistOnline/Home.aspx http://www.miamidade.gov/govaction/matter.asp?matter=190936&file=true&fileAnalysis=false&yearFolder=Y2019

5.0 TERMS AND CONDITIONS

The County’s draft form of agreement is attached. Proposers should review the document in its ENTIRETY. The terms and conditions summarized below are of special note and can be found in their entirety in the agreement:

a) Supplier/Vendor Registration

Prior to being recommended for award, the Proposer shall complete a Miami-Dade County Supplier/Vendor Registration Package.

For online Supplier/Vendor registration, visit the Supplier Portal: https://supplier.miamidade.gov.

b) Insurance Requirements

The Contractor shall furnish to the County, Strategic Procurement Department, prior to the commencement of any work under any agreement, Certificates of Insurance which indicate insurance coverage has been obtained that meets the stated requirements.

c) Inspector General Reviews

In accordance with Section 2-1076 of the Code, the Office of the Inspector General may, on a random basis, perform audits on all County contracts, throughout the duration of said contracts, except as otherwise indicated. Application of the one quarter (1/4) of one percent fee assessment shall not apply to the resultant Contract.

d) User Access Program

Pursuant to Section 2-8.10 of the Code, any agreement issued as a result of this Solicitation is subject to a user access fee under the County User Access Program (UAP) in the amount of two percent (2%). All sales resulting from this Solicitation and the utilization of the County Contract price and the terms and conditions identified therein, are subject to the two percent (2%) UAP.

6.0 ATTACHMENTS

Draft Form of Agreement Proposal Submission Package, including:

Proposer Information Section Web Forms – Submittal Form, Subcontracting Form, Contracting with Entities of Foreign Countries of Concern Prohibited

Affidavit, Kidnapping, Custody Offenses, Human Trafficking and Related Offenses Affidavit, Lobbyist Registration Affidavit (for an Oral Presentation and/or Recorded Negotiation Meeting or Sessions), Contractor Due Diligence Affidavit Form 1 – Price Proposal Schedule https://supplier.miamidade.gov/

PROPOSER INFORMATION

Nothing in this Solicitation shall in any way be utilized to request documentation relating to or authorizing consideration of a proposer's social, political, or ideological interests when determining if the proposer is a responsible vendor or give a preference to a proposer based on the proposer's social, political, or ideological interests.

Proposer’s Experience, Qualifications, and Past Performance

1. Describe the Proposer’s past performance and relevant industry/subject matter expertise in performing projects within the past three

(3) years in each of the following areas of Section 2.0 of the Scope of Services: 2.2 (A), General Financial Consulting, 2.2 (B), Financial Analysis, Studies and Modeling and 2.2 (C), Performance Management and Measurement. Provide a detailed description of Proposer’s:

a. Relevant experience in financial advisory or consulting, including strategic and business planning, fiscal policy development, and other related financial consulting services.

b. Experience in performance management, performance measurement, and similar consulting engagements.

c. Background in financial analysis, studies, modeling, and related services.

d. Number of years that Proposer has been in existence, the current number of employees, and the primary markets served.

The Proposer should provide sufficient information that demonstrates the Proposer’s ability to perform the requested services.

Provide any samples of any recognition for industry leadership in these areas of expertise.

2. Provide a detailed description of three (3) comparable contracts (similar to those requested in Section 2.0 Scope of Services) which the Proposer has either ongoing or completed within the past three (3) years. The description should identify for each project:

(i) client,

(ii) description of work,

(iii) total dollar value of the contract,

(iv) dates covering the term of the contract,

(v) client contact person and phone number,

(vi) statement of whether Proposer was the prime contractor or subcontractor, and

(vii) the results of the project.

Where possible, list and describe those projects performed for government clients or similar size private entities (excluding any work performed for the County).

3. List all contracts which the Proposer has performed for Miami-Dade County. The County will review all contracts the Proposer has performed for the County in accordance with Section 2-8.1(g) of the Miami-Dade County Code, which requires that “a Bidder’s or Proposer’s past performance on County Contracts be considered in the selection of Consultants and Contractors for future County Contracts.” As such the Proposer must list and describe all work performed for Miami-Dade County and include for each project: (i) name of the County Department which administers or administered the contract, (ii) description of work, (iii) total dollar value of the contract, (iv) dates covering the term of the contract, (v) County contact person and phone number, (vi) statement of whether Proposer was the prime contractor or subcontractor, and (vii) the results of the project.

4. Describe relevant experience in public sector financing and funding (governmental programs) and in the transit and transportation

(road construction projects) industries, nationally and internationally.

5. Provide information concerning any prior or pending litigation, either civil or criminal, involving a governmental agency or which may affect the performance of the services to be rendered herein, in which the Proposer, any of its employees or…